Notices
Results 1 to 17 of 17

Thread: Are humans very unhealthy compared to others?

  1. #1 Are humans very unhealthy compared to others? 
    Forum Ph.D. Raziell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    927
    It seems every human has ATLEAST one disease or affliction that is lifelong, most have more - some unlucky ones tonns of them. Also temporary diseases are hitting us left and right all the time throughout life.

    Is it the same among insects and animals? Are we humans really as much sick as it seems?


    A lie is a lie even if everyone believes it. The truth is the truth even if nobody believes it. - David Stevens
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,168
    Find me a wild rabbit without worms and I'll buy you dinner.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope skeptic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    4,843
    Humans are probably healthier than wild animals. The reason is that we have some medical understanding, some good medicines, excellent vaccines, and a knowledge of hygiene.

    And lots of people have no life-long diseases. Most of us will have some minor quirk, such as shortsightedness, or being overweight, but that is not the same as a disease.

    As Ophiolite pointed out, pretty much every wild animal harbours parasites of one form or another. They have to live with the pain and discomfort. Many are weakened to the point where they become predator-fodder.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Forum Bachelors Degree
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    482
    I have isolated sleep paralysis, patello-femoral knee pain syndrome and trochanteric bursitis. In other words a bit of a dodgy leg and i don't always sleep so well.

    We no longer die from 'old age' because our diagnostic techniques allow us to know most times, precisely from what someone has died. As skeptic says, we're healthier than wild animals, mostly due to hygiene not medicine.

    In other words our apparent 'unhealthyness', is an artefact of medical progress.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard i_feel_tiredsleepy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    2,256
    A lot of humans harbour parasites too, they're just not the really nasty kinds. Pinworm and Toxoplasma are fairly common, though the infection rates vary greatly by culture, studies found that 80%+ of people in France carried Toxoplasma, probably because of the more common practice of consuming raw beef there.

    The post above are correct of course, chronic disease isn't particularly more common in humans than other species. I've worked in the veterinary field and diabetes, chronic kidney disease, chronic urinary crystals, and arthritis are all frequently encountered in domestic cats.
    "I almost went to bed
    without remembering
    the four white violets
    I put in the button-hole
    of your green sweater

    and how i kissed you then
    and you kissed me
    shy as though I'd
    never been your lover "
    - Leonard Cohen
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    57
    Quote Originally Posted by i_feel_tiredsleepy
    A lot of humans harbour parasites too, they're just not the really nasty kinds. Pinworm and Toxoplasma are fairly common, though the infection rates vary greatly by culture, studies found that 80%+ of people in France carried Toxoplasma, probably because of the more common practice of consuming raw beef there.

    The post above are correct of course, chronic disease isn't particularly more common in humans than other species. I've worked in the veterinary field and diabetes, chronic kidney disease, chronic urinary crystals, and arthritis are all frequently encountered in domestic cats.
    Yes, but you will not find diabetes in livestock. Take cattle for instance, they eat pretty much nothing but carbs and live in their own manure through rain, sleet and snow and they do not get diabetes. Livestock medicine is superior to human and pet medicine and prevents livestock from having diabetes.

    I know cattle are not wild anymore but in reality it could be argued that cattle are healthier than humans especially when you factor in the hygiene factor.

    It takes a true optimist to suggest people are not devolving into a weaker species. Humans have lost all basic immune instincts and seek immunity in a bottle while wildlife maintains their immune instincts. Though a rabbit may have worms their system can deal with it and when spring comes they will reproduce and create thousands of new rabbits while humans continue to become more and more infertile.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope skeptic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    4,843
    Bleep

    Humans are not devolving. In fact, there is no such thing. Just evolution in another direction.

    We are not permitting evolution to weed out harmful genes. That is true. However, we are on the verge of a revolution in genetic engineering. Future generations will be the result of such genetic tinkering. The children of perhaps 100 years hence will be healthier, better looking, smarter, more athletic etc.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    57
    Quote Originally Posted by skeptic
    Bleep

    Humans are not devolving. In fact, there is no such thing. Just evolution in another direction.

    We are not permitting evolution to weed out harmful genes. That is true. However, we are on the verge of a revolution in genetic engineering. Future generations will be the result of such genetic tinkering. The children of perhaps 100 years hence will be healthier, better looking, smarter, more athletic etc.
    I know humans are not devolving, we are only getting more naive. :-D

    I don't think you will like my comment on the stem cell topic. People like evidence here and I haven't seen any evidence to suggest genetic engineering is ever going to amount to anything other than a super powerful business.

    Naturally the children 100 years hence will be healthier, better looking, smarter and more athletic because of the second coming of christ and everyone will be restored to their prime and perfection. :wink:

    FYI Skeptic, I'm on this forum in hopes of proving that we have control over our immune system the same as we have control over our discussions on forums like these. I don't think it will work out here but on a personal level I can prove we can control our immune responses.

    Infertility is easily cured outside of medicine but cures outside of medicine eliminate the donations going to GE research and stem cell research goes bankrupt.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope skeptic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    4,843
    Bleep

    I try to live up to my nom de plume. A good skeptic requires good evidence. In medicine, that boils down to double blind, randomised, placebo controlled clinical trials. Even then, it takes a few such trials to provide sufficiently strong evidence to nail down the efficacy of any particular treatment.

    If you want to demonstrate control of the immune system, or curing infertility outside of medicine, then you need to post excellent evidence.

    More than excellent. The general principle is that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. It sounds to me like your claims are genuinely extraordinary. I trust your evidence matches the claim.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    57
    Quote Originally Posted by skeptic
    Bleep

    I try to live up to my nom de plume. A good skeptic requires good evidence. In medicine, that boils down to double blind, randomised, placebo controlled clinical trials. Even then, it takes a few such trials to provide sufficiently strong evidence to nail down the efficacy of any particular treatment.

    If you want to demonstrate control of the immune system, or curing infertility outside of medicine, then you need to post excellent evidence.

    More than excellent. The general principle is that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. It sounds to me like your claims are genuinely extraordinary. I trust your evidence matches the claim.
    Being that you are a skeptic if my claims worked for you, would that hold any merit because the chance of me getting science involved is slim to none.

    You see, science can round up 20 or a 100 people for testing at the snap of a finger, of course they pay the people but me I have a hard time rounding up anyone who can see past the TV news and try my claims to be cured and to find someone who will go on record after they have seen the attacks on me personally is even less likely. Mind you, no one attacks my claims, they only attack me personally with accusations of me being a con, scam or fraud under the sole principle that if I were legitimate I would be famous. I get called a con, scam and fraud despite the fact that I do not bill. I work on donations only and to avoid false accusations I allow people to donate after they are cured.

    In theory this is a science based forum it would be nice if anyone here could direct me to a science based research organization that was interested in helping me provide sufficiently strong evidence. Naturally we would be assuming science is interested in consistent cures which require no medicine.

    I have contacted many universities, research centers and even skeptics groups about getting validation and no takers. One simple example is I maintain that I can take 20 people with deadly food allergies and have them cured in less than two weeks, all of them. James Randi Educational Foundation was all over this until they found out I used no products. You see they were only interested in proving the obvious that there is no product that will cure anyone outside of very effective drugs like the ones used with livestock. They were not interested in the fact that I could take 20 people deathly allergic to peanuts and have them eat a jar of peanut butter two weeks later with no ill reaction, they were only interested in proving something would fail double and triple blind studies. Double and triple blind studies have no relation to cures but apparently neither does science or we would see more cures.

    I assume this thread is made up of people who assume the primary goal of medicine and science is curing disease but despite the wealth of knowledge on display here, it is very unlikely they know of anyone interested in seeing 20 people cured of deadly allergies in less than two weeks. Naturally you all assume the world is loaded with people researching and searching for cures but you all assume wrong. Read between the line in grant and donated money and you will see it isn't going for cure research at all.

    Anyway, I would love to be proved wrong but so far no one has proved me wrong in 15 years and I can prove me right 100% of the time, but it has to be one person at a time and one cure at a time.

    I can't force medicine or science to choose the right. I personally think it is scientifically impossible for mainstream medicine or science to do so. I would love to be proved wrong which is why I joined this forum. Eventually I will get to the meat of what I do and some of you will understand if I do not get banned before getting that far. The last time members of a forum started "drinking my kool-aid" and started warming up to the idea of cures outside of medicine we all got banned. If I do not get banned you may very well enjoy the kool-aid yourself.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope skeptic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    4,843
    Bleep

    I cannot help you, and no-one I know of in this or other forums, can help you in getting your claims checked.

    The problem is that there have been plenty of other people with claims similar to yours. In a few cases, those people managed to get their claims checked by proper medical researchers, and the claims were found to be incorrect. For example : researchers have checked the 'power of prayer' and found it to be no better than suggestion. It did not work at all when the people being prayed for did not know they were being prayed for.

    Without meaning to be impolite, my view is that there is a close to 100% probability that your claims also would prove to be incorrect.

    Medical researchers are very smart people. They will not spend their time and their research dollars investigating something that appears to be so seriously unlikely to prove positive.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Forum Bachelors Degree
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    482
    Double-blinded placebo controlled trials are far from the only research method used in medical science. It depends on your research question. First you need to learn them, then decide which is best.

    You don't need funding. I'm doing a study with 140 patients and no money (just lots of my own time. I'm not 'science' i'm a person, and clicking my fingers is not helping to recruit people, try as i might).

    Even if you need money charities are the best source. Find an allergy charity (if one doesn't exists it's because sufferers don't deem it important enough). But they don't just throw their money around - you need to convince them.

    The tools are all there. It's up to you if you want to pick them up.

    If your claim is true, allergy sufferers will be interested, they are the ones 'buying' the product/service.

    This is way off topic.
    The mark of a moderate man is freedom from his own ideas - Tao Te Ching

    Fancy a game of chess?
    http://www.itsyourturn.com/
    Challenge me, Delphi, and join the Pythian games.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    57
    Quote Originally Posted by skeptic
    Bleep

    I cannot help you, and no-one I know of in this or other forums, can help you in getting your claims checked.

    The problem is that there have been plenty of other people with claims similar to yours. In a few cases, those people managed to get their claims checked by proper medical researchers, and the claims were found to be incorrect. For example : researchers have checked the 'power of prayer' and found it to be no better than suggestion. It did not work at all when the people being prayed for did not know they were being prayed for.

    Without meaning to be impolite, my view is that there is a close to 100% probability that your claims also would prove to be incorrect.

    Medical researchers are very smart people. They will not spend their time and their research dollars investigating something that appears to be so seriously unlikely to prove positive.
    So we are told. We are told how science and universities have dealt with all kinds of crazies. I've heard it first hand from the science research centers and the universities. What you are not considering though is the fact that prayer obviously worked well enough for someone to push it to the next level and so what if double and triple blind studies trashed prayer, why couldn't money, time and research been invested in why prayer works 1 out of 100 or 1 out of 1000?

    Learn what made the 1 and learn to duplicate it and you have ONE THING, consistent cures. You have the ability to control your immune system and immune responses.

    Quote Originally Posted by skeptic
    Medical researchers are very smart people.
    OMG or OMS whatever you guys say around here, this is what bugs me the most, it can only mean one thing, medical researchers are very corrupt.

    Yes, medical research debunked modality after modality and product after placebo product and in the end completely dismissed the actual tangible healing effect and never invested a moment or a dime on the actual tangible healing that used "nothing". Prayer shows you do not need a product to create an healing effect. Medical researches could have investigated the healing itself but no instead they trashed the modality buried the cures under the trash title "placebo".

    This can only mean one thing, because we all agree that medical researchers are very smart people it means they are very corrupt as well.

    Skeptic, I do want to thank you for pointing out the fact that I am not going to get scientific validation or research. That means a lot to me. I'm sure you believe I am a quack even though some of my points make the hair on your neck scientifically stand up but at least you are not naive enough to debunk me based on the fact that I am not famous.

    Science has set it up to were any mention of a cure is automatically grounds for dismissal on the bases of insanity. LOL Unless it talks about potential future cures that only require zillions of more dollars because they just about have it.

    No, science has completely sabotaged any chance of cures being made public, you pretty much said it yourself. And....
    Quote Originally Posted by skeptic
    Medical researchers are very smart people.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    57
    Quote Originally Posted by Prometheus
    Double-blinded placebo controlled trials are far from the only research method used in medical science. It depends on your research question. First you need to learn them, then decide which is best.

    You don't need funding. I'm doing a study with 140 patients and no money (just lots of my own time. I'm not 'science' i'm a person, and clicking my fingers is not helping to recruit people, try as i might).

    Even if you need money charities are the best source. Find an allergy charity (if one doesn't exists it's because sufferers don't deem it important enough). But they don't just throw their money around - you need to convince them.

    The tools are all there. It's up to you if you want to pick them up.

    If your claim is true, allergy sufferers will be interested, they are the ones 'buying' the product/service.

    This is way off topic.
    Quote Originally Posted by Prometheus
    This is way off topic.
    I don't know Prometheus, cures that require no medicine or products will have an effect on every topic. I suspect you already have the point and I appreciate it.

    I would like to make it clear for everyone one else, instead of trashing the placebo modality or product because it doesn't consistently work, embrace the effect that does consistently work and learn to apply it on command.

    Who cares about the "placebo" lets use the "effect".

    I've been curing people for more than 15 years. Getting clients was very easy back in the day. However with all the cookie cutter alternative doctors and all the useless alternative medicine, cures which have nothing to do with medicine, western or alternative always get instantly slapped into the woo woo category as Skeptic so kindly pointed out.

    But here I am so I am not just sitting around with my teeth in my mouth. I'm creating awareness. I'm planting seeds. You cannot force the truth down people's mouths, I've tried.

    The problem with allergies and using them to attract research is you can Google allergies right now and see millions of products, treatment and modalities claiming to cure allergies for the amazingly low price of $29.99. That creates a problem and the worst of it is, if you go to an allergy forum you can talk about all the gimmick products and modalities all day long as long as the forum owner knows they are gimmicks, but discuss what we are discussing here and you will be banned in minutes.

    So finding people on allergy forums is out.
    Finding people at allergy clinics are out.
    Finding people on Craigslist doesn't work, I know.
    Finding people on the radio doesn't work, I know.

    I could bottle up gimmick pills with a pretty label and be wealthy in a year or two but finding a market for cures that require no products is proving impossible. All medicine has to do is ignore the claims. I can't even get anyone to take me to court because that would give me to opportunity to defend my claims in front of people. I can use the term cure and term diagnose in ways that doctors cannot legally use them and do so with complete immunity. Just because medicine and science ignore my claims does not mean they do not know the truth of my claims.

    Consistent cures affect all topics especially this one.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope skeptic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    4,843
    Bloop

    If your system is as good as you say, then it is testable and sufficient evidence can be gained to get it accepted.

    I suggest you get hold of the book :"Lorenzo's Oil" and read it. People there in a similar situation proved an unorthodox treatment. You may be able to use some of the same ideas.

    You still have not told me what your system is. Meditation? Something else?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    57
    Quote Originally Posted by skeptic
    Bleep

    If your system is as good as you say, then it is testable and sufficient evidence can be gained to get it accepted.

    I suggest you get hold of the book :"Lorenzo's Oil" and read it. People there in a similar situation proved an unorthodox treatment. You may be able to use some of the same ideas.

    You still have not told me what your system is. Meditation? Something else?
    I will check out the book and if it applies to what I am involved with great but if you are forming your hypothesis in the back of your mind based on your current understanding of health and healing which would make you toss "meditation" it is doubtful that the book would be relevant.

    Yes it is something else, something you will not be able to relate anything you are aware of now UNLESS you are fully aware of a consistent method of curing diseases medicine cannot cure.

    Hey, if the book is a good read I might just read it for the entertainment value. Once you know that the human immune system can cure any disease, good reading is hard to find. When you become aware of cures, you become aware of how much science and documentaries are actually science fiction and you can't enjoy reading as much. Look at this way, you are still looking for the "answer" and you have all the reading in the world to do. If you had the answer what would you do with yourself? You would be doing exactly what I am doing.

    Cheers.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #17  
    Forum Professor arKane's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Washington state
    Posts
    1,181
    Back on topic

    It's a fact that the state of human health is getting better. We can actually measure the average life span of humans and every few years it gets revised upward on a regular basis. I am also sure that animals that we care about also have measurably longer life spans.

    I am equally sure that as a species, we gain much more by our rather large social data base of knowledge that keeps getting larger at an ever accelerating pace, than we lose by not living as a wild animal does.

    All animals, humans included live in an equilibrium with all other life forms in our biosphere. The more we learn about those equilibrium’s the more we can tilt them in our favor (unfortunately they could be tilted against us as well).

    In general life for humans is getting better and that's good enough for me. But then I live in the U.S. at this particular time in history.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •